Posted:

March 17, 2015

2:28 am

The recent controversy surrounding a racist bus chant perpetrated by University of Oklahoma Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity members and subsequent expulsion of two chant-leading members has reignited the debate of free speech on college campuses.

The expulsion is part of a troubling pattern of universities across the nation – including the University of California – imposing inappropriate restrictions on free speech.

While the University of Oklahoma’s condemnation of racist speech is commendable, Boren’s unilateral decision to expel those students without due process and for a “misuse” of free speech is not. Public college administrators are not Supreme Court justices – they should not act as moral arbitrators by levying punishment based on their interpretation of acceptable speech. To do so is to jeopardize the university’s commitment to freedom of speech.

Moreover, under current legal precedent established by R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, hate speech is only punishable if it leads to an imminent threat of violence. The bus chant was unquestionably racist, but it was not a direct and believable threat of violence against any person.

To be clear, these fraternity members’ actions were deplorable and unacceptable. But our disagreement with the fraternity members’ speech does not give us the right to forcibly silence it. Freedom of speech is a founding tenet of the American political landscape and has a long tradition in academia. Without freedom of speech, social activists and leaders who sought meaningful change such as Martin Luther King Jr., Susan B. Anthony, and 1960s and 1970s feminists – whose ideas were very unpopular – would have been silenced. The racist speech of the SAE fraternity brothers isn’t comparable to the speech of social justice activists, but it’s the price we pay as a society for an unconditional support of free speech.

Misuse of the free speech argument is not exclusive to the University of Oklahoma – colleges around the nation have seen numerous restrictions on free speech and academic freedom in the past year. Such actions lead colleges down a turbulent path, where innovative and controversial thoughts and ideas that promote productive dialogue may not be openly expressed. Since college is one of the first true opportunities for young people to encounter so many other unique individuals, the restriction of free speech is especially counterproductive for an open learning atmosphere.

Last summer during the 50th anniversary of Berkeley’s Free Speech Movement, UC Berkeley Chancellor Nicholas Dirks asked students in an email to express “civility” in their free speech. While civility is important for everyday speech, Dirks imposing his definition of “civility” onto students is akin to requesting that students censor themselves when speaking under the protections of the First Amendment. This is all quite ironic since the purpose of the celebration of Berkeley’s Free Speech Movement was to recognize former Berkeley students who protested against the UC administration’s ban of on-campus political discussions.

Such restrictions on freedom of speech are truly a nationwide problem. One of the most the abusive infringements occurred at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in August, when the school rescinded its tenured employment offer to Professor Steven Salaita. The school rescinded his offer because his tone was not “civil” when he tweeted his criticisms toward Israel after a bombing on the Gaza Strip.

Infringements on free speech are especially dangerous because they bolster the perception that expression of controversial ideas may lead to lesser life opportunities, such as reduced employment opportunities. The perception encourages those who think differently to censor and frame their controversial thoughts in a socially acceptable manner. And as a result of such censorship, we may scare off our great thinkers and activists.

Racist speech like that of the SAE fraternity chapter at the University of Oklahoma can and should be widely and publicly condemned. But ultimately, we all have a responsibility to protect this fundamental right for all uses of free speech.

I hope everyone reads and internalizes this message. Well written and coherent throughout. I found it troubling there wasn’t more of this in the media.

klsdjfklasdjflkj

Absolutely..UCLA and UC Berkeley need to make sure that they allow freedom of speech as well. This includes letting comedians like Bill Maher come to speak, and letting even racists spew their vitriol.

Adam OnWeb

Absolutely right. Freedom of Speech must be protected.

We can’t trust faculty and administration to decide what they feel is acceptable.
In the case of antisemitism in UCLA and Berkley, it seems obvious that the faculty and administration have their own racial biases and can’t be trusted to administer fairly.

Kendi Kim

So long as truth is accessible to everyone in society, and the population is well-informed, habituated to critical thinking, and free to act as they choose, then society can handle whatever bigotry spews out of people’s mouths.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

Poll

LA City Council recently voted to reinstate limitations regarding homeless LA drivers living in their cars. These regulations will run until January, and states that they are prohibited from spending the night in their cars on residential streets, or live in their vehicles at any time within a block of a park, school, preschool or daycare facility. What are your thoughts on this?
Reinstating these limitations could cause more issues than it could fix. Homeless drivers that use their cars as a home are not the root problem the LA City Council should be focused on addressing.
It was a good idea to reinstate these limitations, since homeless drivers could possibly become intrusive and pose a threat to residential areas and places where children are most present.
These limitations are neither good or bad, and does not affect me as a student because I am not homeless, nor am I living in my car.
I have feelings about this that are not described in the options above.
Submit View results without voting »

Looking for help to assist wheelchair-bound incoming Female Freshman in the dorms at UCLA Duties are in the evening for bathroom/showering assistance, etc. Good opportunity for practical experience for medical/nursing/therapy student while earning money. Starting date would be weekend of September 21st. Looking for two females that could alternate or cover for each other. Pay negotiable if interested for more information please email [email protected] or call/text 310-717-6823 • Help Wanted

Teen Supervision Single Parent professor seeks graduate or professional student for occasional supervision of two teen children, particularly for overnight care. Duties include supervision of meals and homework, transportation to and from school and events, and other duties while parent travels for work or personal plans. Duties will include overnight stays in the family's guest room (with private bath) so that children are not alone for out-of-town travel by the parent. Children are 8th graders and attend school near the UCLA campus. They are largely self-regulating, generally cooperative, and they provide all necessary care to the family dogs. Applicant should have a car with insurance, be responsible, relate well with young people, and be fine with dogs. Fee is negotiable. Frequency is approximately twice per month, usually for two nights. This is a great way to pick up some extra income with little or no impact on studies. Applicants should submit basic information about themselves, summary of experience, and the names of two references to: Professor Gary Segura [email protected] • Child Care Wanted